Janette Manrara Cried for a Week After Missing Out on Strictly Come Dancing Hosting Job
Baca dalam 60 detik
- Janette Manrara mengaku hancur setelah kalah dalam seleksi posisi pembawa acara utama Strictly Come Dancing.
- Meski memiliki rekam jejak delapan tahun sebagai penari profesional dan lima tahun memandu It Takes Two, ia tetap tersisih oleh Emma Willis, Josh Widdicombe, dan Johannes Radebe.
- Ia kini memetik pelajaran berharga dari kegagalan tersebut dan yakin akan ada peluang lain di industri televisi.
Janette Manrara, a British presenter and professional dancer, expressed deep disappointment after she was not chosen to fill the main presenter's chair on Strictly Come Dancing. The 42-year-old said she cried for a week once she learned the role she coveted had gone to someone else.
The disappointment came after she went through a series of chemistry tests with other candidates. In an interview on the Great Company podcast hosted by Jamie Laing, Janette said she had been told she performed well in those tests. That assurance made her feel she had a strong chance, especially given her long track record in the Strictly world.
But those hopes faded when the show's management picked Emma Willis, Josh Widdicombe, and Johannes Radebe to replace Tess Daly and Claudia Winkleman. "I went home and it was a really bitter pill. I cried for a week. I won't lie. I was broken," she recalled.
Janette saw herself as a strong candidate because she had taken on various roles in the Strictly ecosystem. She first appeared as a dancer, then moved to hosting It Takes Two, and also fronted the live tour for five years. On that tour, she even played a dual role as Tess and Claudia in front of the judges and the dancing couples.
"If you look at it on paper, all the pieces of the puzzle were there. It was natural for me to think I had a chance," she said. Even so, she realised the competition was very tight. Big names such as Emma Willis, Rylan Clark, and Zoe Ball also took part in the same chemistry tests.
"What I take from this experience is not the failure to get a job, but the awareness that I have done a very good job over the past seven years honing my presenting skills and understanding the television industry. Other work will come."
For Janette, the bitterness of rejection does not make her regret her career path. She instead feels proud to have competed in the same space as top figures. She described the process as a form of indirect recognition of her capacity as a presenter.
This setback also highlights another side of the entertainment industry: selection for top positions is not always linear with loyalty and experience. In many global television shows, final decisions often weigh internal dynamics, new creative directions, and market needs. Something similar happens in Indonesia, where television stations often choose new faces for flagship programmes even when established figures are considered capable.
For the Indonesian public, Janette's story can be a mirror showing that the pressure behind the scenes of the entertainment industry is no less intense than what appears in front of the camera. Presenters are required not only to speak well but also to adapt to changing audience tastes and management strategy.
Going forward, the question is no longer who failed, but how a professional treats rejection as fuel to rise again. Janette has chosen not to dwell on it. She believes that as long as skills keep being sharpened, the next door will surely open. Will the television industry give more room to proven talent like her?
